Umar Gul is as good as Mitchell Johnson...

[moz]

IF he had played the same number of games, especially tests, as Johnson and had the same exposure as Johnson up until now, on various wickets, Umar Gul would be as good as the aussie.

Given time, i know the Gul will match Johnson's performances...

[Mercenary]

Gul would be better in limited overs forms (probably already is) and would be gaining in tests. I still think he needs to regain the skill he use to have with the new ball but seems to have lost now.

[spectator]

he needs to learn to swing the new ball. he can seem it alright. May be some lectures from waqar would be ideal.

[mali9]

gula is alot better then mitchel johnson anytime.

[ahmedzee]

Gul has better average than Johnson and has also proved himself in sub-continent, which Johnson hasn't. I rate him much higher than Mitch, however, not denying the fact that Johnson is also a very good bowler.

[Garuda]

Gul may actually become better than Johnson but saying that if he plays this many games then he will be better sounds more of an expectation.

He may become much better or he may not. Who knows?

[DHONI183]

I think that Umar Gul is a nose ahead of Mitchell Johnson.

[ChennaiKings]

You freaking Kidding me.

[moz]

No freaking on this thread, Gul probably will be better, has a brilliant yorker in his locker already, he just needs to play more test matches..

Anyone think he will make the ICC top ten rankings in tests if pakistan start playing some more? (he will definetley make the odi one)

[Garuda]

By the way, how do you decide this player is better than that (talking about settled intl ones).

Some people think statistics doesn't prove it. If we keep that out then how do you measure? because on a given day a player may perform much better compared to the other one and vice versa.

[90MPH]

They are about the same i would say. Look at Johnsons figures today, they look awful. Gul does swing the old ball very well, infact i think he has the best yorker around at the moment.

[siddharth]

There is a definite difference between the selection .Look at Mitchell he started playing tests after he reached his top physical shape and fully trained as a bowler .

Wheras Gul started as a raw talent and way too fragile as well as undercooked. So there will be an obvious difference in performance and statistics.

In Australia bowlers start their career as fully cooked and in pakistan they start as mere raw talent then learn .Difficult comparison

[IronMan2009]

Originally Posted by siddharth In Australia bowlers start their career as fully cooked and in pakistan they start as mere raw talent then learn .Difficult comparison

Unfortunately i see an obsession with these kind of half-baked comparisons here. It actually proves nothing. It is meaningful to compare when two players have played over a period against various oppositions in various conditions say Murali vs Warne, Kallis vs Dravid. You have plenty of data there.

[ChennaiKings]

At this point Johnson is better than Gul in both Bowling and batting.....End of story

[moz]

When Gul first came on the test seen, think it was in England around 2002-2003, he bolwed very well, before succombing to injury.

I think him and Johnson are similar in terms of stature, Gul is a bit bulkier now, and have that some grit and determination when bowling...

[IM NOT YOU]

johnson is slightly better than gul in ODI bowling. but that margin of SLIGHTLY can change VERY easily after april/may. we will definitely find out who is better after aus-pak series.

[abc_to_xyz]

No! Both of them are in different categories!! Mitchell is a fast bowler who mainly relies on Pace!! While Gul is more of a swing bowler..... Umer Gul do have lot more experience then him.. So I would rate him better....

[ali_ed2006]

overall johnson is a better player because he can bat.

[Taurus]

Umar Gul has played more ODIs and Twenty20 matches than Mitchell Johnson and almost as many Tests (18 vs 21). Umar Gul is a vastly over-rated bowler - his abilities in the minds of the membership on her far outstrip his achievements in the game so far. He has promise but no more than that, whereas Mitchell Johnson has so far roughed up and dislodged some of the best batsmen in the world with his pace and aggression. Umar Gul should be very happy indeed if he ever attains the same level of performance. Mitchell is a late bloomer and certainly doesn't have significantly more cricketing experience than Umar - if you look at the number of matches each has played in the respective forms of the game, they have probably played about the same amount of cricket overall.

[Indian Pretending to To Be Pakistani]

Originally Posted by Taurus Umar Gul has played more ODIs and Twenty20 matches than Mitchell Johnson and almost as many Tests (18 vs 21). Umar Gul is a vastly over-rated bowler - his abilities in the minds of the membership on her far outstrip his achievements in the game so far. He has promise but no more than that, whereas Mitchell Johnson has so far roughed up and dislodged some of the best batsmen in the world with his pace and aggression. Umar Gul should be very happy indeed if he ever attains the same level of performance. Mitchell is a late bloomer and certainly doesn't have significantly more cricketing experience than Umar - if you look at the number of matches each has played in the respective forms of the game, they have probably played about the same amount of cricket overall.

I could not agree more with you. Umar Gul is over rated but he has hardly been mentioned by commentator or ex players outside pakistan.

personally for me, both michel johnson and Umar gul are decent bowlers.

[moz]

More recently though Jonhson has far more experience, especially in tests, and is in far superior cricekting setup. If Gul was South African or Australian, even a New Zealander, his talents would have got him a lot further by now...

[Zaz]

Originally Posted by moz More recently though Jonhson has far more experience, especially in tests, and is in far superior cricekting setup. If Gul was South African or Australian, even a New Zealander, his talents would have got him a lot further by now...

Agree guls progress has been stunted a little due to a combination of injuries and lack of cricket, whereas johnson is going from strength to strength due to volume of cricket and exposure to playing all over the world

[kingusama92]

Umar Gul is simply better then Mitchell Johnson, Umar Gul has everything except major Swing. Most batsman would rather play Mitchell Johnson then Umar Gul because of his unbelievably variety of lengths and his brilliant seam position.

Mitchell Johnson has serious potential to be a truly great bowler if he can get that inswinger going at will like Akram used to do it. Both have a long way to go but they are great prospects for their respective countries.

[cornelius]

Gul better than Johnson, as of right now? What a joke....

[iafzal]

Originally Posted by moz IF he had played the same number of games, especially tests, as Johnson and had the same exposure as Johnson up until now, on various wickets, Umar Gul would be as good as the aussie. Given time, i know the Gul will match Johnson's performances...

what is the need of this thread.
Most Pakistani will say he is better than Johnson in ODI and probably as good in tests.

[Xiaan]

Gul has a perfect yorker, he needs to use it more against top order bastmen. Plus, Gul has a long way to go, he's going to overtake Johnson sooner or later if he's not already better than him.

[Taurus]

Come on, Umar Gul is not better than Mitchell Johnson. It's very difficult to average under 30 nowadays especially when you're playing the quality of team Australia have been playing since Mitch came into the side. Like I said, Gul has potential, but playing cricket irregularly under a pathetic cricketing board, he will do well to double his international wickets tally in the next five years. He has good reverse swing and his pace has increased since I saw him in England, but his consistency isn't there - whether it will come with regular cricket is down purely to conjecture. As things are at this moment in time, Mitch is on the big stage show-casing himself as a fantastic seam bowler. Until Gul can do that then there's no comparison worth making. Certainly if offered the choice between the two of them now I'd take Johnson without even thinking about it.

[Xiaan]

i think this issue will be settled till 22nd April till then no1 can prove who's better.

[moz]

Originally Posted by iafzal what is the need of this thread. Most Pakistani will say he is better than Johnson in ODI and probably as good in tests.

in that case what is the need of any thread? its a decent discussion about two rising fast bowlers...

Gul is surely the smarter bowler, maybe not as quick, both look to have good consistancy though...

[Xiaan]

Originally Posted by ChennaiKings At this point Johnson is better than Gul in both Bowling and batting.....End of story

We all know that Gul is pretty good at playing some strokes

[ChennaiKings]

Originally Posted by Xiaan We all know that Gul is pretty good at playing some strokes

You should say all Pakistanis know that Gul is an All rounder...for others he is just a decent bowler and not in par with Johnson as this thread indicates

[cornelius]

Originally Posted by ChennaiKings You should say all Pakistanis know that Gul is an All rounder...for others he is just a decent bowler and not in par with Johnson as this thread indicates

Are we talking about Gul or Ajit Agarkar?

[Cric_King]

Gul is a better bowler than johnson, why? because his much more consistent , better control, better variations and the best death bowler in the world!!!

However Johnson has developed into a very good bowler over the last few months, he can now swing the ball both ways and at his pace and left arm angle thats very dangerous

It will be the key battle between the teams, they are both leading the bowling attack of their teams, both played similar amount of matches and eqaul experience, both fast and aggressive and they both play with alot of heart.

However mitchell will win the battle as it will be easier for him to get out pakistani batsmen ,and more difficult for gul to get out australian batsmens, as they are better at playing pace then pakistani batsmen.

Remember johnson is 27 and gul is only 24, and already i say gul has accomplished more, and i know who i would want in my team

[Cric_King]

Originally Posted by adeelakram76 I could not agree more with you. Umar Gul is over rated but he has hardly been mentioned by commentator or ex players outside pakistan.

does that make sense?

umer gul is over rated but he has hardly been mentioned by commentator or ex players outside pakistan

then how is he over rated if no one outside pakistan mentions him?

who is he overated by then?

[waqar akram]

Originally Posted by IronMan2009 Unfortunately i see an obsession with these kind of half-baked comparisons here. It actually proves nothing. It is meaningful to compare when two players have played over a period against various oppositions in various conditions say Murali vs Warne, Kallis vs Dravid. You have plenty of data there.

murali is better than warne, warne has mcragth and gillespie to back him up. murali has no one, yes i agree vaas is the greatest non pakistani fast bowler in the region but he's there just to roughen up the old ball. comparison between dravid and kallis id have to pick kallis once again for the same reason. dravid played in a team with ganguly,sachin,sehwag,laxman.......kallis only recently started playing ina team with a very credible batting attack. this kallis and murali are both players who dont wilt under pressure and who certainly dont draw matches tht their teams would have otherwise won. better to play for a win than a 50+ average. murali and kallis are ahead of warne and dravid even statistically.

but since ur indian murali's record doesnt matter cuz he's a CHUCKER right?

[waqar akram]

i dont think gul as as good at johnson in test matches at the moment. yes he may have the upper hand in t20 and odi cuz of his death bowling. but johnson is swinging the ball alot and generating more pace. gul suddenly became really fast in the t20 wc07 but i havent seen him generating alot of speed these days. mayb it has to with the hair. samson syndrome.

[waqar akram]

Originally Posted by ChennaiKings You should say all Pakistanis know that Gul is an All rounder...for others he is just a decent bowler and not in par with Johnson as this thread indicates

ok ok fine. ISHANT is better than johnson....happy now?

[IronMan2009]

Originally Posted by waqar akram blah blah blah

I am not here to compare anyone. Infact that is one of my least favorite topic after the topic of forming XI players based on something. I just say there is more obsession here to compare anything with anything.

[Cric_King]

Originally Posted by waqar akram i dont think gul as as good at johnson in test matches at the moment. yes he may have the upper hand in t20 and odi cuz of his death bowling. but johnson is swinging the ball alot and generating more pace. gul suddenly became really fast in the t20 wc07 but i havent seen him generating alot of speed these days. mayb it has to with the hair. samson syndrome.

ok so your conclusion johnson is better cuz his faster?

then by that logic shoaib akhter is the best bowler in the world , followed by brett Lee, fidel edwards , poor logic

and you think gul was only good in 07 20/20 world cup cuz he was faster (which is debatable as i dont think he has got slower or faster but i suspect if you only have to bowl 4 overs a day you can use your whole effort whereas in tests you have many overs and fatigued makes you get slower the more you bowl) and not cuz his reverse swinging yorkers, variations and excellent control

conclusion = you know nothing

[waqar akram]

Originally Posted by Cric_Wiz ok so your conclusion johnson is better cuz his faster? then by that logic shoaib akhter is the best bowler in the world , followed by brett Lee, fidel edwards , poor logic and you think gul was only good in 07 20/20 world cup cuz he was faster (which is debatable as i dont think he has got slower or faster but i suspect if you only have to bowl 4 overs a day you can use your whole effort whereas in tests you have many overs and fatigued makes you get slower the more you bowl) and not cuz his reverse swinging yorkers, variations and excellent control conclusion = you know nothing

understand the importance of good pace, not the kind tht sprayed all over the place like tait and edwards. a good ball is a wicket taking ball at faster speeds. add swing to that and u get a better bowler. and hell yeah SHOAIB AKHTAR IS THE BEST BOWLER ON THE PLANET.

[Random Aussie]

Umar Gul is a much better ODI and T20 bowler.

MJ is better in Test cricket, unfortunately Gul has not played much of that recently so has not been able to improve on his record.

It is very difficult to rate any young Pakistan players like Gul, Butt, Malik, Afridi because they play so little cricket against good opposition.

The ODI series won't tell you much as far as a comparison, Gul is Pakistan's number 1 bowler, MJ is about our 4th preference in ODI cricket. Too expensive.

[usman_ash14]

Originally Posted by Random Aussie Umar Gul is a much better ODI and T20 bowler. MJ is better in Test cricket, unfortunately Gul has not played much of that recently so has not been able to improve on his record. It is very difficult to rate any young Pakistan players like Gul, Butt, Malik, Afridi because they play so little cricket against good opposition. The ODI series won't tell you much as far as a comparison, Gul is Pakistan's number 1 bowler, MJ is about our 4th preference in ODI cricket. Too expensive.

[kingusama92]

Originally Posted by waqar akram ok ok fine. ISHANT is better than johnson....happy now?

he won't be happy until you say Munaf Patel and Praveen Kumar as better then Johnson as well.